DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 11/5/2025. In virtue of this communication claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Response to Amendment
In response to the action mailed on 8/6/2025, the Applicant has filed a response amending the claims.
In view of Applicant’s response the claim objections are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are moot because the arguments do not apply to the newly found references and/or interpretation being made in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6, 9-11 and 13-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erdos et al (US Pub 20100142966) in view of Rhoads (US Pub 20050256616) in further view of Cato (US Pat 5229593).
Regarding claim 1. Erdos discloses a system for laser communication between an aircraft and an airport ground station (Fig 1, where a system (100) performs laser communication between an aircraft (102) and an airport ground station (104)), the system comprising:
one or more data collection devices, the one or more data collection devices configured to collect aircraft data (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises one or more data collection devices (e.g. at network interface 138) (as shown in Fig 2B) and where the one or more data collection devices (e.g. at network interface 138) are configured to collect aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data));
an embedded system within the aircraft (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises an embedded system (e.g. 110, 136) (as shown in Fig 2B) within the aircraft (102)), the embedded system comprising:
a signal processor (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the embedded system (e.g. 110, 136) comprises a signal processor (136)); and
a first link transceiver mounted on the aircraft (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the embedded system (e.g. 110, 136) comprises a first link transceiver (110) mounted on the aircraft (102));
a second link transceiver mounted on the airport ground station, wherein the second link transceiver is configured to optically connect directly to the first link transceiver and receive the aircraft data therefrom (Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises a second link transceiver (106) (as shown in Fig 2A) mounted on the airport ground station (104) and where the second link transceiver (106) is configured to optically connect directly (as shown in Fig 1) to the first link transceiver (110) and receive the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) therefrom).
Erdos fails to explicitly disclose one or more processors; a first storage device, the first storage device operably connected to the one or more processors, wherein the first storage device is configured to store the aircraft data received from the one or more data collection devices asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data can be initiated.
However, Rhoads discloses
one or more processors (Fig 2B, where a network interface (e.g. 350) comprises one or more processors (e.g. at server 310)); and
a first storage device, the first storage device operably connected to the one or more processors (Fig 2B, where the network interface (e.g. 350) comprises a first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and where the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) is operably connected to the one or more processors (e.g. at server 310) (see Hensbergen et al (US Pub 20030229713) Fig 1 for details)), wherein the first storage device is configured to store aircraft data received from one or more data collection devices asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data can be initiated (Fig 2B, para [30] where the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) is configured to store aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) received from one or more data collection devices (i.e. during travel) asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) can be initiated (i.e. upon arrival at a travel destination)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system (100) as described in Erdos, with the teachings of the network interface (e.g. 350) as described in Rhoads. The motivation being is that as shown a network interface (e.g. 350) can comprise one or more processors (e.g. at server 310) and a first storage device (e.g. at server 310), where the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) can store aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) received from one or more data collection devices (i.e. during travel) asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) can be initiated (i.e. upon arrival at a travel destination) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the system (100) as described in Erdos and have the system (100) with the network interface (138) comprising one or more processors (e.g. at server 310) and a first storage device (e.g. at server 310), where the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) stores aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) received from the one or more data collection devices (e.g. at network interface 138) (i.e. during travel) asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) can be initiated (i.e. upon arrival at a travel destination) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the system (100) with a known technique of a known network interface (e.g. 350) for the purpose of optimally processing and storing data of an aircraft obtained during travel and which data is to be transmitted upon arrival to a travel destination for performing control and management and which technique implements the benefits of using a server into the system which includes for example centralizing data, enhancing security, improving efficiency and enabling remote access and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. aircrafts, network interfaces,…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known network interface (e.g. 350) into a known system (100), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Erdos as modified by Rhoads fails to explicitly disclose the first link transceiver being a first laser link transceiver and the second link transceiver being a second laser link transceiver, and a first data buffer, the first data buffer operably connected to the storage device, wherein the first data buffer is configured to receive the bulk of the transmission of the aircraft data from the storage device; and the first laser link transceiver operably connected to the data buffer, wherein the first laser link transceiver is configured to receive the aircraft data from the data buffer.
However, Cato discloses
a first link transceiver being a first laser link transceiver and a second link transceiver being a second laser link transceiver (Fig 1, where a first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) is a first laser link transceiver and a second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) is a second laser link transceiver), and
a first data buffer, the first data buffer operably connected to a device, wherein the first data buffer is configured to receive transmission of data from the device (Fig 1, where a signal processor (e.g. 11, 16) comprises a first data buffer (16), the first data buffer (16) is operably connected to a device (18), and the first data buffer (16) is configured to receive transmission of data from the device (18)); and
the first laser link transceiver operably connected to the data buffer, wherein the first laser link transceiver is configured to receive the data from the data buffer (Fig 1, where the first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) is operably connected to the data buffer (16), and the first laser link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) is configured to receive the data from the data buffer (16)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system (100) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads, with the teachings of the first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) as described in Cato. The motivation being is that as shown a first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and a second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) can be laser link transceivers, a signal processor (e.g. 11, 16) can have a first data buffer (16) operably connected to a device (18) so as to receive transmission of data from the device (18), and the first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) can be operably connected to the data buffer (16) so as to receive the data from the data buffer (16) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the system (100) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and have the system (100) with the first link transceiver (i.e. 110) and the second link transceiver (i.e. 106) being laser link transceivers, have the signal processor (136) with a first data buffer (16) operably connected to the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) (i.e. at network interface 138) so as to receive the bulk of the transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) (i.e. at network interface 138), and have the first link transceiver (i.e. 110) being operably connected to the data buffer (16) so as to receive the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the data buffer (16) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the system (100) with a known technique of a known first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) for the purpose of optimally communicating data by using known lasers which provide high bandwidth/data rate, long transmission distance and precise targeting and for optimally storing data in a temporary manner by using known buffers in order to reduce data loss and improve signal integrity and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical link transceivers, signal processors,…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) into a known system (100), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding claim 2. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, further comprising:
a second data buffer operably connected to the second laser link transceiver (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where a second signal processor (126) (as shown in Fig 2A) comprises a second data buffer (e.g. 16’) (as shown in Cato Fig 1) operably connected to the second laser link transceiver (106)), wherein the second data buffer is configured to receive the aircraft data from the second laser link transceiver (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the second signal processor (126) with the second data buffer (e.g. 16’) is configured to receive the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the second laser link transceiver (106)); and
a second storage device operably connected to the second data buffer, wherein the second storage device is configured to receive the aircraft data from the second data buffer, and wherein the second storage device is configured to store the aircraft data (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where a second storage device (i.e. at network interface 128) (e.g. at system 200 as shown in Rhoads Fig 2B, Fig 3) is operably connected to the second signal processor (126) with the second data buffer (e.g. 16’), the second storage device (i.e. at network interface 128) (e.g. at system 200 as shown in Rhoads Fig 2B, Fig 3) is configured to receive the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the second signal processor (126) with the second data buffer (e.g. 16’), and the second storage device (i.e. at network interface 128) (e.g. at system 200 as shown in Rhoads Fig 2B, Fig 3) is configured to store the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data)).
Regarding claim 3. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, further comprising: a ground station network, wherein the ground station network is configured to receive the aircraft data from the second storage device (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises a ground station network (e.g. at 104) and where the ground station network (e.g. at 104) is configured to receive the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the second storage device (i.e. at network interface 128) (e.g. at system 200 as shown in Rhoads Fig 2B, Fig 3)).
Regarding claim 4. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein:
the ground station network is further configured to upload ground station data and transmit the ground station data to the second storage device for storage (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the ground station network (e.g. at 104) is further configured to upload ground station data (e.g. IFE content) and transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to the second storage device (i.e. at network interface 128) (e.g. at system 200 as shown in Rhoads Fig 2B, Fig 3) for storage);
the second storage device is further configured to store the ground station data and transmit the ground station data to the second data buffer (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the second storage device (i.e. at network interface 128) (e.g. at system 200 as shown in Rhoads Fig 2B, Fig 3) is further configured to store the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) and transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to the second signal processor (126) with the second data buffer (e.g. 16’));
the second data buffer is further configured to transmit the ground station data to the second laser link transceiver (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the second signal processor (126) with the second data buffer (e.g. 16’) is further configured to transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to the second laser link transceiver (106));
the second laser link transceiver is further configured to wirelessly transmit the ground station data to the first laser link transceiver (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the second laser link transceiver (106) is further configured to wirelessly transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to the first laser link transceiver (110));
the first laser link transceiver is further configured to transmit the ground station data to the first data buffer (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the first laser link transceiver (110) is further configured to transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to the signal processor (136) with the first data buffer (e.g. 16));
the first data buffer is further configured to transmit the ground station data to the first storage device (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the signal processor (136) with the first data buffer (e.g. 16) is further configured to transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) (i.e. at network interface 138));
the first storage device is further configured to store the ground station data and to transmit the ground station data to an aircraft downloading module (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) (i.e. at network interface 138) is further configured to store the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) and to transmit the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) to an aircraft downloading module (e.g. at aircraft 102)); and
the aircraft downloading module is further configured to download the ground station data (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the aircraft downloading module (e.g. at aircraft 102) is further configured to download the ground station data (e.g. IFE content)).
Regarding claim 5. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein the ground station data comprises aircraft software updates, aircraft infotainment system updates, aircraft parameter information, and/or environmental parameter information (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, paras [14][21] where the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) comprises aircraft infotainment system updates).
Regarding claim 6. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein the ground station data comprises data to configure devices connected to the aircraft (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, para [21] where the ground station data (e.g. IFE content) comprises data to configure devices connected to the aircraft (102)).
Regarding claim 9. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein the embedded system further comprises a controller, wherein:
the controller is operably connected to the first storage device and to the one or more processors via a data bus (Rhoads Fig 2B, where server (310) has a controller (see Hensbergen et al (US Pub 20030229713) Fig 1 for details), and the controller (e.g. at server 310) is operably connected to the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and to the one or more processors (e.g. at server 310) via a data bus);
the controller is operably connected to the first data buffer (Cato Fig 1, where a controller (i.e. a digital I/O control) is operably connected to the first data buffer (16)); and
the controller is configured to transfer data between the first storage device and the first data buffer (Rhoads Fig 2B, where the controller (e.g. at server 310) configures transfer of data between the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and the signal processor (136) (as shown in Erdos Fig 2B) with the first data buffer (e.g. 16) (as shown in Cato Fig 1)).
Regarding claim 10. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein the aircraft data includes video data, audio data, environmental parameter data, and/or aircraft parameter data (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) includes aircraft parameter data).
Regarding claim 11. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein the aircraft data is collected during aircraft flight time and/or aircraft taxi (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) includes operational information and it is known that operational information is collected during aircraft operations which includes aircraft flight time and/or aircraft taxi of the aircraft (102)).
Regarding claim 13. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein the first laser link transceiver is encased in an optical protector (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where wherein the first laser link transceiver (110) is encased in an optical protector (112)).
Regarding claim 14. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato also discloses the system, wherein communication between the first laser link transceiver and the second laser link transceiver is established only when a line of sight between the first laser link transceiver and the second laser link transceiver is established (Erdos Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where communication between the first laser link transceiver (110) and the second laser link transceiver (106) is established only when a line of sight (as shown in Fig 1) between the first laser link transceiver (110) and the second laser link transceiver (106) is established).
Regarding claim 15. Erdos discloses a method of laser communication between an aircraft and an airport ground station (Fig 1, where a system (100) performs a method of laser communication between an aircraft (102) and an airport ground station (104)), the method comprising:
uploading aircraft data via an aircraft uploading module (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises an aircraft uploading module (e.g. at network interface 138) (as shown in Fig 2B) that uploads aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data)), wherein the aircraft data is generated by one or more sensors or by one or more recording devices (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) includes operational information and it is known that operational information is generated by one or more sensors (see for example Zeliff et al (US Pub 20080033607) para [18]));
a signal processor within the aircraft, wherein the signal processor is operably connected to the aircraft uploading module (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises a signal processor (136) (as shown in Fig 2B) within the aircraft (102) and where the signal processor (136) is operably connected to the aircraft uploading module (e.g. at network interface 138));
a first link transceiver being mounted on the aircraft and operably connected to the signal processor (Fig 1, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises a first link transceiver (110) (as shown in Fig 2B) being mounted on the aircraft (102) and operably connected to the signal processor (136));
connecting optically to the first link transceiver via a second link transceiver, wherein the second link transceiver is mounted on the airport ground station (Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the system (100) comprises a second link transceiver (106) (as shown in Fig 2A) that connects optically to the first link transceiver (110), and where the second link transceiver (106) is mounted on the airport ground station (104)); and
receiving the aircraft data from the first link transceiver at the second link transceiver (Fig 1, Fig 2A, Fig 2B, where the second link transceiver (106) receives the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the first link transceiver (110)).
Erdos fails to explicitly disclose storing the aircraft data within a first storage device asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data can be initiated.
However, Rhoads discloses
storing aircraft data within a first storage device asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data can be initiated (Fig 2B, para [30] where a network interface (e.g. 350) comprises a first storage device (e.g. at server 310) configured to store aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) (i.e. during travel) asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) can be initiated (i.e. upon arrival at a travel destination)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system (100) as described in Erdos, with the teachings of the network interface (e.g. 350) as described in Rhoads. The motivation being is that as shown a network interface (e.g. 350) can comprise a first storage device (e.g. at server 310) to store aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) (i.e. during travel) asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. performance data, system usage data, passenger transaction data associated with aircraft 800) can be initiated (i.e. upon arrival at a travel destination) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the system (100) as described in Erdos and have the system (100) with the network interface (138) comprising a first storage device (e.g. at server 310) to store aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) (i.e. during travel) asynchronous to transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) until a bulk transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) can be initiated (i.e. upon arrival at a travel destination) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the system (100) with a known technique of a known network interface (e.g. 350) for the purpose of optimally processing and storing data of an aircraft obtained during travel and which data is to be transmitted upon arrival to a travel destination for performing control and management and which technique implements the benefits of using a server into the system which includes for example centralizing data, enhancing security, improving efficiency and enabling remote access and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. aircrafts, network interfaces,…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known network interface (e.g. 350) into a known system (100), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Erdos as modified by Rhoads fails to explicitly disclose the first link transceiver being a first laser link transceiver and the second link transceiver being a second laser link transceiver, and receiving the bulk transmission of the aircraft data from the storage device at a first data buffer within the aircraft, wherein the first data buffer is operably connected to the storage device; and receiving the aircraft data from the data buffer at a first laser link transceiver, wherein the first laser link transceiver is operably connected to the data buffer.
However, Cato discloses
a first link transceiver being a first laser link transceiver and a second link transceiver being a second laser link transceiver (Fig 1, where a first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) is a first laser link transceiver and a second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) is a second laser link transceiver), and
receiving transmission of data from a device at a first data buffer, wherein the first data buffer is operably connected to the device (Fig 1, where a signal processor (e.g. 11, 16) has a first data buffer (16) configured to receive transmission of data from a device (18), and the first data buffer (16) is operably connected to the device (18)); and
receiving the data from the data buffer at a first laser link transceiver, wherein the first laser link transceiver is operably connected to the data buffer (Fig 1, where the first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) receives the data from the data buffer (16), and the first laser link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) is operably connected to the data buffer (16)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system (100) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads, with the teachings of the first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) as described in Cato. The motivation being is that as shown a first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and a second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) can be laser link transceivers, a signal processor (e.g. 11, 16) can have a first data buffer (16) operably connected to a device (18) so as to receive transmission of data from the device (18), and the first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) can be operably connected to the data buffer (16) so as to receive the data from the data buffer (16) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the system (100) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and have the system (100) with the first link transceiver (i.e. 110) and the second link transceiver (i.e. 106) being laser link transceivers, have the signal processor (136) with a first data buffer (16) operably connected to the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) (i.e. at network interface 138) so as to receive the bulk of the transmission of the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) (i.e. at network interface 138), and have the first link transceiver (i.e. 110) being operably connected to the data buffer (16) so as to receive the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) from the data buffer (16) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the system (100) with a known technique of a known first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) for the purpose of optimally communicating data by using known lasers which provide high bandwidth/data rate, long transmission distance and precise targeting and for optimally storing data in a temporary manner by using known buffers in order to reduce data loss and improve signal integrity and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical link transceivers, signal processors, …) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known first link transceiver (i.e. 12, 13) and second link transceiver (i.e. 12’, 13’) into a known system (100), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Claim 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erdos et al (US Pub 20100142966) in view of Rhoads (US Pub 20050256616) in further view of Cato (US Pat 5229593) in further view of Cooper et al (US Pub 20220350325).
Regarding claim 7. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato fails to explicitly disclose the system, wherein the ground station network comprises or is operably connected to one or more machine learning models, and wherein the aircraft data is used as training data for the one or more machine learning models.
However, Cooper discloses
a station network comprises one or more machine learning models, and wherein aircraft data is used as training data for the one or more machine learning models (Fig 1, Fig 3, paras [41][46][48][49][50] where a station network (e.g. 30) comprises one or more machine learning models and where aircraft data (e.g. wear measurement data) is used as training data for the one or more machine learning models).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ground station network (e.g. at 104) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato, with the teachings of the station network (e.g. 30) as described in Cooper. The motivation being is that as shown a station network (e.g. 30) can comprise one or more machine learning models and aircraft data (e.g. wear measurement data) can be used as training data for the one or more machine learning models and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the ground station network (e.g. at 104) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato and have the ground station network (e.g. at 104) comprise one or more machine learning models and have the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) be used as training data for the one or more machine learning models i.e. as an alternative so as to have the ground station network (e.g. at 104) with a known technique of a known station network (e.g. 30) for the purpose of optimally predicting the remaining life of components in the aircraft (102) based on the aircraft data (e.g. maintenance data, operational information, trending data and configuration data) and which technique makes it easy to plan in advance for proper component replacement and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. aircrafts,…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known station network (e.g. 30) into another similar ground station network (e.g. at 104), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Claim 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erdos et al (US Pub 20100142966) in view of Rhoads (US Pub 20050256616) in further view of Cato (US Pat 5229593) in further view of Guccione (US Pub 20150363168).
Regarding claim 8. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato fails to explicitly disclose the system, wherein the first storage device and the second storage device are solid state drives.
However, Guccione discloses
a storage device being a solid state drive (para [31] where a storage device (e.g. shift register) is a solid state drive).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and second storage device (e.g. at system 200) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato, with the teachings of the storage device (e.g. shift register) as described in Guccione. The motivation being is that as shown a storage device (e.g. shift register) can be a solid state drive and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and second storage device (e.g. at system 200) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato and have the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) be a first solid state drive and have the second storage device (e.g. at system 200) be a second solid state drive i.e. as an alternative so as to have the first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and second storage device (e.g. at system 200) with a known technique of a known storage device (e.g. shift register) for the purpose of optimally storing information by using a known technology of solid state drive and which technique provides a fast and reliable manner for storing data and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. storage devices,…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known storage device (e.g. shift register) into another similar first storage device (e.g. at server 310) and second storage device (e.g. at system 200), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erdos et al (US Pub 20100142966) in view of Rhoads (US Pub 20050256616) in further view of Cato (US Pat 5229593) in further view of Grover (US Pub 20230421258).
Regarding claim 12. Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato fails to explicitly disclose the system, wherein communication between the first laser link transceiver and the second laser link transceiver occurs at a rate of at least 100 gigabits per second.
However, Grover discloses
communication between a first laser link transceiver and a second laser link transceiver occurs at a rate of at least 100 gigabits per second (Fig 1, paras [34][35][36] where a system has a communication between a first laser link transceiver (106A) and a second laser link transceiver (106B) at a rate of at least 100 gigabits per second).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system (100) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato, with the teachings of the system as described in Grover. The motivation being is that as shown a system can have a communication between a first laser link transceiver (106A) and a second laser link transceiver (106B) at a rate of at least 100 gigabits per second and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the system (100) as described in Erdos as modified by Rhoads and Cato and have the system (100) with a communication between the first laser link transceiver (110) and the second laser link transceiver (106) at a rate of at least 100 gigabits per second i.e. as an alternative so as to have the system (100) with a known technique of a known system for the purpose of optimally communicating data at very high data rates and which technique allows the system (100) to increase transmission bandwidth and capacity and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical link transceivers,…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known system into another similar system (100), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 16, claim 16 is similar to claim 2, therefore, claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
Regarding Claim 17, claim 17 is similar to claim 3, therefore, claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 3.
Regarding Claim 18, claim 18 is similar to claim 4, therefore, claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 4.
Regarding Claim 19, claim 19 is similar to claim 5, therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 5.
Regarding Claim 20, claim 20 is similar to claim 7, therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 7.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to DIBSON J SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0868. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached on 5712723078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DIBSON J SANCHEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634